More Than a Summary of Their Parts: Hamlet, Macbeth, and Catcher in the Rye

While opinions on literature differ significantly, most scholars agree on which works of literature can be considered “great.” Not necessarily “great reads” but great as in the effort the author made to create them, the impact they had on the world around them, and their likelihood of standing the test of time. Regardless of one’s personal opinion about James Joyce’s Ulysses, it cannot be denied that it’s a significant contribution to literature, and most professors would agree that no English major’s college experience is complete without at least attempting to read it.

So what does make a work of literature great? Is a great work of literature just a great story? While an interesting and engaging plot line is a key ingredient to the critical and commercial success of a book, if a great novel was simply a great story, readers could just read quick summaries of the events that take place in the novel, and get everything they needed out of it.

It’s hard to imagine what someone who only read summaries of great works of literature would even think about them. He’d probably wonder what the big deal about any of these books was. A Catcher in the Rye summary would go something like “Holden Caulfield is unhappy at his pricey prep school, and still not over the untimely death of his beloved brother Allie. He goes to New York City, hires a prostitute, but does not sleep with her and harasses cabbies about what happens to ducks when pond water freezes over.” It would sound crazy.

What about a Jane Eyre summary? “Jane is a mistreated orphan who eventually gets sent to a miserable boarding school where her only friend dies. She becomes a governess to the ward of a wealthy and mysterious man who, after treating her with curious disdain, falls in love with her. They’re supposed to get married, but it turns out he has another wife stashed in the attic. She runs away to live with three strangers, one of whom proposes to her and asks her to move to India but she says no. She thinks she hears her former boss/fiance’s voice calling to her in a dream so she goes back only to find out he’s been blinded by a fire. Conveniently, his first wife is now dead, so she marries him.” It sounds like a terrible soap opera, not a beautiful novel. A Macbeth summary would seem even crazier.

But Shakspeare’s early fans wouldn’t have dreamed of simply reading/watching a quick summary of his great comedies and tragedies. The people who came to see Shakespeare’s plays generally knew how they would end. Finding out what happened wasn’t the point. They came for the language, for the characters, and excitement of a real drama unfolding before them. “Now Playing: a Hamlet summary wouldn’t look terribly impressive on a theater’s marquee.

Because it’s the experience of reading (or watching) a work of literature that makes it great. The works of literature that stand the test of time are the ones that have relatable characters and themes that readers can connect with: love, friendship, disappointment, betrayal, and the hope of a happy ending.